09TBILISI1100, GEORGIA: ARMENIAN BISHOP DISCUSSES CHALLENGES FOR

To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cablesIf you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol).Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #09TBILISI1100.

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 TBILISI 001100
SIPDIS
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/16/2019
TAGS: PGOVPHUMPRELKIRFAMGG
SUBJECT: GEORGIA: ARMENIAN BISHOP DISCUSSES CHALLENGES FOR
ETHNIC ARMENIANS
REF: A. YEREVAN 0314
¶B. TBILISI 0770
¶C. TBILISI 0538
Classified By: AMBASSADOR JOHN F. TEFFT. REASONS: 1.4 (B) AND (D).
(C) Summary: The Ambassador met with Bishop Vazgen
Mirzakhanian, Primate of the Armenian Apostolic Holy Church
Diocese in Georgia (AAC) May 20, as a follow-up to his
meeting on regional issues with Shavarsh Kocharian, Deputy
Foreign Minster of Armenia, and His Holiness Karekin II, the
head of the Catholicos of All Armenians, in Yerevan with
Ambassador Yovanovich (Ref A). Bishop Mirzakhanian cited the
Millennium Challenge Corporation road improvements, and the
GoG increase in budgetary support to the Samtskhe-Javakheti
region as major positive step for his community. The Bishop
highlighted three major unresolved issues of importance to
ethnic Armenian Georgians: the ability to use Armenian as an
official language at local levels, educational opportunities
for ethnic Armenians, and the return of disputed church
properties. We will raise these issue with Minister for
Reintegration Temur Yakobashvili, who is the government point
person on these issues. End Summary.
Language Barriers
¶2. (C) The number one concern of ethnic Armenians in
Samtskhe-Javkheti remains recognition of Armenian as a
regional language (Ref B). Mirzakhanian said that if even
"unofficial" recognition of the Armenian language would be
helpful. He noted that in practice all local business is
conducted in Armenian, however, local residents who can not
speak Georgian are at an extreme disadvantage and are unable
to use government structures, such as courts to carry out
legal proceedings. Mirzakhanian said that even if Armenian
was not granted the status of an official language, then
simultaneous translation in Armenian should be provided as a
basic accommodation during court and other official
administrative proceedings.
Education Challenges
¶3. (C) Mirzakhanian said that education in the region
remained at a basic level which did not yield economic growth
or support the integration of ethnic Armenian citizens in
wider Georgian culture. He proposed a joint
Armenian-Georgian University in Akhalkalaki which would raise
Georgian language skills in the region and provide advanced
education to help ethnic Armenians be more competitive for
mid and upper level jobs in the Georgian economy. Currently,
200 students every year leave the region for education in
Armenia, and do not return. The Georgian Ministry of
Education has expressed a willingness to dedicate resources
to a bilingual educational program (as does the Government of
Armenia), but after three years there has not been tangible
progress on this issue. As a result, ethnic Armenians are
sending their children abroad to Armenian or Russian language
institutes of higher education. The lack of local higher
education institutions limits the intellectual community in
the region largely to teachers of elementary schools.
Return of Armenian Churches
¶4. (C) Mirzakhanian said that unless the law is changed to
permit formal recognition of religious faiths (ref C) other
than the Georgian Orthodox Church, he expected that there
would be little progress on the return of historical churches
to their original pre-Soviet congregations. Although
Mirzakhanian had expected the law to have been amended in
March allowing the AAC, Roman Catholics, Jews, and Muslims to
register as official religions, the law has not yet been
amended. Despite earlier indications to the AAC that Temur
Yakobashvili, Minister of Reintegration, was working an
QYakobashvili, Minister of Reintegration, was working an
amendment to the civil law, Mirzakhanian said that he has
checked with Parliamentary officials who have confirmed that
they had no new drafts law pending on the issue, nor were
aware of any proposed changes to the current law. The
Ambassador undertook to raise this issue with Yakobashvili
during their next meeting. By Mirzakhanian,s count, seven
churches in Tbilisi are Armenian in origin, as well as 300
others throughout Georgia. The Ambassador mentioned that the
GOC has said that it had a claim to a number of GOC origin
churches located in Armenia. Mirzakhanian said that GOC
officials have never officially lodged a complaint nor
supplied a list of any disputed GOC churches in Armenia with
the AAC. He said provisions of Armenian law existed which
address competing claims on churches. Mirzakhanian said
conversely, the AAC has provided the GOC with such
information and made formal requests through appropriate
channels.
Current Satus of Legislation
TBILISI 00001100 002 OF 002
¶5. (C) Comment: In many areas, notably in infrastructure
development, the GOG has shown a willingness to engage a
previously largely-ignored Armenian minority. Nonetheless,
the refusal to legally recognize faiths other than the GOC
has long been a contentious issue. The Ministry for
Reintegration prepared to present a new proposal to the
cabinet in early April to resolve the issues of recognition
of other religions formally as Entities of Public Law.
However the deputy State Minister for Reintegration was
advised not to present the proposal to the cabinet without
consultation with the Patriarchy. Upon consultation, the
Patriarchy advised that with protests taking place, times
were too tense and the proposal should wait. We will continue
to encourage all sides to work towards an equitable and
mutually acceptable solution.
TEFFT

The information recorded on this site has been extracted from http://Wikileaks.org (Georgia) database..

We wish to express our gratitude to Julian Assange and his team for making this data available as it is an important public record.

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:

The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.

The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.

The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.